district under 60 seconds, you fail. you have to give them information and access. it is a great idea, voter registration drives on base. unique access how to register to vote, not necessarily the whole process. but how and people voting at home. i can order a pizza from 10 -- i can order a pizza from my phone right now and get it delivered here. that is the level of service that people expect. this young regeneration expects the world to in direct with us the way we interact with it. when you are looking at your plant, you have to think like that, inevitably. >> getting to our service

members in a timely manner matters. i understand a lot has been done to try to do that. the problem is, a lot of our list are not cleaned up. we send these things out and they are still not been received by the military service member to, or their spouse. more needs to be done to make sure that we have the correct address. i think this is something also about our election officials can work to help as well, to make sure that they have appropriate addresses and we are giving these into the hands of our military service members, and their families, so they can return them on time. >> i will say this is a hemingway-esque the single sentence. what can you do? you can link to fpa.gov.

we are trying to make this quick and seamless. if a state has online registration, we are driving the person to the on-line registration. if a state has online delivery system, we are driving them to that. the state have this infrastructure themselves. they do not need us anymore. second, the administration has endorsed the private right of action and has endorsed that in the last session of congress, as was a request asking for that. third, with the automatic balance of the last election cycles been repealed, now it is for a single calendar year and only for military personnel. we believe it should be for military and overseas persons,

and for the fall election cycle. -- the fall election cycle. -- shakira full election -- full election cycle. the overseas direct could be a big element in order to reduce the binder down to nine or 10 pages. the fact is, within individual states to have exceedingly different rules for different elections with the same form. we need to get those standardize. >> the next question. it describes as a result of the 2010 census, -- >> as a result of the 2010 census, there are not only retrying lines for the congressional districts, but also for the state house and state senate.

until there is any litigation about our resolve, how is a local official going to mail out ballots? they do not know what the voter is entitled to. is there a way to ensure that litigation about redistricting or about access does not result in breaches of the 40-day roll and disenfranchisement of the overseas voters and military voters? >> no, but that is an issue that election officials and courts are aware of. >> i was in texas recently about the issues over the redistricting. the one of the discussions there was a long lead time now needed to get ballot set, to get them out at least 45 days before.

right now, tx's primary is set for april 6, but they are in court trying to get this redistricting down. it is highly doubtful that they will have the primary on the sixth because they will never get that done let me make -- get that done. >> let me make an observation. there are some things that we need to do to get better, but can you imagine having this conversation as constructed four years ago? i think it is incumbent on all of these people, some really smart people, to make this better. and we are making this better. and that is the 22 of the time frame, making our military voters -- that is our 2012 time frame, making our military voters able to participate with more ease. i want to thank all of you.

>> thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> florida's primary is tomorrow. both mitt romney and newt gingrich are campaigning there. mitt romney will hold an event tomorrow at the villages of live at 6:45 p.m. eastern on c-span. and tonight, new to gingrich holds a campaign rally in tampa. michael reagan and herman cain endorsed him this weekend. you can see the rally with newt gingrich tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. correct c-span's wrote to the white house political coverage takes you live to the campaign trail with the candidates. >> you will find more and more people with that -- with a mass of opportunity foreign

exchange and trade. if i'm president, one of the first things i will do is to draw american and latin american businesses closer together this is an opportunity not of charity, but an opportunity that will help lift both places in the world. >> this is a new, a grand coalition of americans coming together because they want to create a common -- a country where we unleashed the american spirit and rebuild the country that we love. that is what 2012 is all about. [applause] >> mayor white, your 105 years old. >> good to see you, sir. >> your very kind. -- you are very kind. >> tomorrow night, watch our coverage of florida's primary results with candidate speeches and your reactions by phone,

facebook, and twitter. tonight on "the communicators" a tour of the second electronics show. that is tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> and now from this morning's "washington journal" a look at the role of conservatives in the gop presidential primaries. host: we want to talk to about the american -- the primary battle unfolding. do you usually endorse a candidate? guest: we do not usually endorse

a candidate. we were founded 48 years ago by william buckley and the iconic conservative movement. we have more into our own group. we have 33 board of director members and most of them represent a significant conservative organization in america. we like to label ourselves a guerrilla group for the movement. we think we are, and we are proud to share it. host: as we head into primary day tomorrow, what is your read on the ground? a lot of polls show mitt romney in at the lead over his closest rival, and newt gingrich. guest: since things started in iowa, has been very volatile and every state that we have been too. we have basically reverted to where we were three weeks ago in florida. if you look at the polls three

weeks ago in florida, mitt romney does, indeed, have a double-digit lead. i think the and rasmussen had him about 15, 16. ahead. he was about 12. had three weeks ago. and -- he was about 12 points ahead at three weeks ago. newt gingrich in florida started out with a double-digit lead. that means a 25-point turnaround for him, which is incredible. but interestingly enough, the momentum did not last very long. after the first debate they got to be about even. and since that time, mitt romney has pulled ahead by a significant percentage. >> looking at a story by the orlando sentinel.

it says that mitt romney hoped to cruise through florida on the republican nomination, but the tea party got in his way. guest: you cannot confuse the two-party with the general public on this -- the tea party with the general public on this. i know there was a significant lead by nuking courage with tea party yours. enda -- beitenu to gingrich with a tea partiers. 'it seems to me that the tea

party in each state has a different perspective given the circumstances. it seems they all stand for the same thing, they want less government in their lives and what the government out, but who they prefer differs from state to state. host: our guest is the chairman of the american conservative union, and also a three-time vice chairman of the republican party of florida, and served two terms as chairman of the gop and florida the number is on the screen. our guest is originally from cuba. he came to the united states in -- when he was 12.

his parents fled the regime in 1960. he became the first hispanic to lead a major state party. he remained the only hispanic republican party chairman in florida history. give us your perspective on the hispanic vote. such a diverse community within the community of course, we're looking at the articles, but do you feel that the latino candidates are reaching out for the vote? guest: oh, they have. if you look at the schedule, one-third of their time are spent in the hispanic communities in florida, south florida and central florida. the reason for that is but in the histories have shown that

60% or 70% of the vote will go to the eventual winner. it and in the past few cycles, it always seems to be those that have gathered in the hispanic community. it is a very important focus group to go after the candidates -- to go after. the candidates have done that and spent a lot of resources in the hispanic media. florida is a little unusual. that has about 1.5 million hispanics. about one-third of cuban- american descent and almost a third out of cuban. hispanics will traditionally vote between 45% to 55% for the republican presidential nominee, which is not the case in other

states. they are very active in republican party politics and very active in the primary. host: but go to the phones and you're from laura in erie, pa., republican line. good morning. caller: thank you for letting us have our views aired. i want to ask -- why is in your group and other conservative groups tying fiscal [no audio] host: laura, we are losing you. guest: i'm not sure i could hear the question. host: i think we lost the direction she was going with that. let's hear from nick on the independent line in sebastien, florida. good morning, nick. caller: thank you for taking my call. you were saying that the tea

party in florida is supporting newt gingrich. from my perspective, he does not seem that different from barack obama. they both want big government and they just want to decide what to this -- to spend their money on, pretty much. the only candidates now for small government is ron paul. guest: ron paul has run for president -- this is his third time, but the most successful effort. and frankly, he -- his libertarian effort has been gaining ground within the conservative movement. before he was more of a footnote. now i would say that if 15% to 20% of conservatives are beginning to like and support some of the libertarian views expressed by ron paul. he has it become an important leader of a movement we take very seriously within the conservative party.

there are three legs of the stool of conservative thought -- national security, domestic policy, and fiscal policy. we have libertarians on a common ground with most conservatives when it comes to fiscal issues. they take a different point of view than most conservatives on foreign policy. and on social policies, the same. they are more of a government to leave me alone and social conservatives want to make sure that traditional volumes are preserved in america. it's our job in the american conservative union is to make sure that the three legs of the stool are upheld, but we want to listen to all conservatives and listen to their point of view. host: this comes to us from the hill. our guest was recently quoted.

tell us what you think this is doing to the debate and to the candidates future. guest: the candidates seem to feel somehow that the philosophical differences between our current candidate field are a acceptable. they're beginning to look at who will be the best fighter, one who will take on this president, who they consider to be a very difficult, and a tough foe. that has made it more difficult and caused the candidates to be a bit tougher with one another so they can show the voters who can stand up to president obama the bus. that has turned the character of this campaign into a different sort of campaign that i would like to see.

we are about on the 19th ave. i thought we did well in the first 10. -- we were off -- we are about at the 19th debate. i thought we did well in the first 10. what they say on the air seems to be what is attracting the voters. the voter wants to see a tough fighter and they are working to convey that image. as someone who wants to look forward to a general election sooner rather than later, i would like to turn back to taking on the president at the -- while at the same time taking on the primary. host: let's hear from joe. caller: i'm interested in super pacs. it is hard to believe that money equates with free speech. the supreme court decision.

it makes no sense to me. a term like winter soldier or liberator. these people did things. it seems to me odd. guest: well, you're going to have about $22 million spent in florida this cycle in the presidential primary. it to up as high as $25 million. this is almost twice as much as in 2008. super pac's play a part and that. conservatives oppose the mccain-feingold legislation. there is more ability to judge the process.

very few people know who is contributing. i do not like the idea. i think americans are entitled to free speech. it provides those with the resources to of a point of view that they believe in expressed. host: robert in miami. bek about what it's like to living in florida. are you getting phone calls? what is it like? caller: there are more ads than usual. i like to read the newspapers and the internet to get my substance of what is going on. i have a question for your guest. are you satisfied with the two front runners right now?

if he had a wish, who would he prefer to be the republican candidate? guest: i am glad you are watching c-span. i think we have had a compass and field. -- a competent field. rick perry has dropped out and he was a popular governor. it has been a tough process. we had many other qualified candidates dropouts. it is a four-person race. i respect many of the people who follow rick santorum. i think conservatives will come together. mitt romney seems to have a good lead. newt gingrich is challenging it. it will make them tougher for the general election.

i was hoping they would spend more time on the issues. this is a process. they can go in the direction which gives them the chance to be the nominee. i think we'll end up with a good candidate. i have cast my vote already. host: you supported mitt romney in 2008. guest: i did. host: do you see it mitt romney as a true conservative? some expressed concern over his conservative credentials. guest: i think all four candidates or conservatives.

if you come from a liberal or moderate state and you're the head of that state, t to difficult to be labeled a conservative. so much to happens in that state has a liberal tone. the key is how did you stand for it? mitt romney had a record of hundreds of vetoes. i thought he did a good job of giving the hostile congress or state legislator he had to deal with. people talk about positions he has taken during the 1990's. i believe in the authenticity of his differences of opinions, especially in social issues, and i take him at his word. he is a downright decent guy. you have to deal with what you

have to deal with. if we talk of the list of potential candidates people in the northeast or midwest, we are bisected america and that is not fair. i take him at his word. aside to new to the gingrich, rick santorum, -- as i do newt gingrich, rick santorum, and ron paul. host: al cardenas is the chairman of the american conservative union and the former florida republican party chairman. here is a story from "usa today." let's look at some of the numbers. 48% would go for mitt romney. 44 percent sign for barack obama. floridalking about today.

host: this is according to polling by mason-dixon. do you think that will sway voters as they look to who could win florida in november? guest: i think at some point it will. there has been a lot of wear and tear in the program with the debates. every time candidates attack each other, president obama seems to do better. look at the state of the union address. our candidates are out there in a slog-fest. they are losing ground to the president.

numbers will change. we're still very competitive with the president. some polls have mitt romney ahead of the president. i think that president obama is a formidable candidate, for better candidate than he is an office holder. whoever doesn't think is the case is not being realistic. host: joseph from kentucky, republican. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i would like to challenge my fellow americans to look at the record of each candidate and how they have voted in the past and if they have been

consistent with what they stand for. i think with the two leading candidates, this is like a two- headed snake. if you knew who was controlling these people and who the money behind these people was, it would open up people's eyes. mitt romney's biggest contributors are banks. host: let's get a response from our guest. guest: if you're a voter, you should visit the website of each candidate. they play at with great detail -- they lay out with great detail the policy positions of the candidates. that should be a first point of it is hard to figure out how candidate is on an issue during a 30-second debate.

i have known most of these candidates for 20 or 30 years. these are all good, decent americans with a desire to help their countries. people of all ilks contribute money for different reasons. i take americans on their word that they give money based on their belief that someone will be the best candidate for the presidency, whether you're giving $10 or $50,000. most people give money to those people whose position they believe in. host: michael in arlington, virginia. caller: hi. thank you for taking my call. i am listening to the former florida republican party chairman. how did the conservatives lose

their way? conservatives don't always have a conservative views. the republicans now are for big business. everything they do they side with big business. we're all voting in the national election. there are 300 million americans. a handful of the business republicans -- do you feel they are conservative? conservative up here in the washington area, they did not rally around you. you cannot go to arizona and teller republican governor of arizona that i did not like what you are doing, stopping spanish people from driving down the streets. i don't understand what views you have as a spanish guy

yourself. what conservative are you? host: let's get a comment from the chairmen. if you can reflect on your heritage and say how that is playing out. he does not think hispanics are being responded to by the republican party. what do you think? guest: i wrote an op-ed piece about immigration reform. it was in the open " washington times." both parties have had their chance to get this thing right and neither has done it. we had a republican majority in the past decade, and president obama had a democratic house and senate and the white house and he is not acted for three years on immigration reform. we have to have law and order. we have to do what is right for america.

we're past 9/11. everybody needs to register some how. we do need a verification process and make sure that people are working and paying taxes. we have to stop illegal immigration. you have 11 million or 12 million people that are here and you have to deal with that. they are from all over the world. we have to fix the system. we have to make sure we have better visa programs -- engineering, science, math. the reasons whymany companies are setting up shop in india and

elsewhere, and we need to open our doors to them. this is happening because we are not opening our doors to them. for people who want to work hard, we do have a need for work permits for agricultural workers. my friends in georgia and alabama were concerned about people not registering and not being legal pass some tough e- verify laws. we need to be balanced but we need to be fair. we have to stop having people in here illegally. those who stay here should contribute to our economy. we have to figure out a way for the others to be able to return home safely at a proper time frame. it is a very complicated issue. keeping 11 million people living underground is not a compassionate thing to do.

host: looking at how maureen dowd is taking on the interaction that president obama had with jan brewer. i want to read an excerpt from her column. she is a columnist with an opinion. what do think of that image? does that make the president more of a hero with hispanic voters? guest: images are important. i could not care about that incident. i care what the president does. he has said hispanic leaders in -- he has had a hispanic leaders in the white house.

he is now passed his third year in office and he has yet to make a single immigration reform proposal to the congress other than a minor component which is his version of the dream act. he has to stop beating the community, beating the country and put forth a proposal and have it voted and debated on. that's what america is all about. it is a battle of ideas and finding the best ways to fix problems in the country. we're at a standstill. we have more unemployed people in this country then we have never had. we have a budget the president proposed $3.7 trillion, 40% of which is debt. our credit rating has been

lowered. investors lose confidence. the only way to create jobs is when the private sector says, "i'm willing to invest and grow my business." we don't have that confidence in america now. the guy at the top has to take responsibility for it. host: let's hear from wayne. caller: good morning. i love your show. and i love your guest you've got there. and he seems like a squared away kind of guy. my father is 93 years old. i asked who he would vote for. he is voting for and newt gingrich. and he has been a democrat all of his life. we agree the guy running this country is a joke. he doesn't have any documents behind him. he comes over as a foreign aid

student. all these records on his college records are all hidden. he has paid $1 million to hide his records. they are trying to produce tax records. we have a guy in the white house without any records. he was born in a hospital -- host: you do not believe the president's birth certificate. what do you think about his perspective? guest: well, look, there are many people that believe as he does and they are labeled as birthers. i have not spent the time on this issue. i have not looked at this or talk with investigators, experts, the fbi to determine the authenticity of these

documents. i'm hoping the process we have in this country vets these things. i'm concentrating on a feeding the press. he is not the only person that shares the point of view. host: let's hear from ron. caller: i saw you put up those polls with the candidates versus obama. you did not put up ron paul's numbers. he was within 1% or two percentage points of obama. i just wanted to know your thoughts on that. it is really just him and mitt romney that can even compare with the president on those numbers. a lot of people seem to label him as unelectable. host: you're a resident of florida. are you voting this week?

are you concerned ron paul is not in florida right now? caller: i am not voting because i'm an independent. i'm not too concerned he is not focusing attention on florida. it is a winner-take-all state. it takes millions and millions of dollars to make an impact. i think his strategy is good. host: let's hear from our guest. guest: i think he is right in terms of strategy. ron paul is somewhere between 8% and 12% in florida. those numbers are not going to change. overall, i presume he is doing the right thing. people in every state want

people to care for their state. if you do not campaigned hard in any state, the voters will penalize you for that. he is probably off and running and doing the right thing. we have february coming up. there are some caucus states where it seems to be doing better. if romney wins florida, february is a good month for him. he has michigan coming up. the gingrich campaign has to strategizing about getting ready for march. host: let's hear from mark in south carolina, a republican. did you vote? caller: yes, i did.

good morning. i supported ron paul and i will always support ron paul. i have a concern with the media and the public at large. i believe it is media generated. you have three other candidates. newt gingrich has been married three times. if you cheat on the two wives, you'll cheat on your country. rick santorum -- who is so old drug-conservative and he has religious conservative views that he wants to shut down our throats. then you have mitt romney who has been flip-floping. i am a simple man. you just said to do research.

i have done that. ron paul is a man of integrity. he is a man who wants to return us back to being a free people. guest: yep. i think ron paul is doing fairly well. he has survived. we're down to four candidates. he is one of them. he is ending up in third place, not fourth place. his voice is going to count. look, ron paul's points of view is going to be considered on a number of fronts. and now his son is in the u.s. senate. he is serving a purpose by staying on the campaign. i think he is a good candidate. i do not share your views on

the other candidates. i am a little more positive about what they represent, frankly. i believe we will win in november. but i do agree with you that ron paul is a good man and he deserves consideration. host: al cardenas is the former party chairman of the florida republican party. sarah palin came out on facebook on a post, and she complains the republicans need a fair primary that is not cut short by the establishment. she is talking about newt gingrich. do you see this as a dividing moment? you have said the interparty war -- the intraparty war needs

to stop. do you see this as a moment that could lead to a split that could see third party candidate? or a lead to a new party what some sort? guest: usually you have the division that is now resoluble if you're of differing views in -- that is not resolvable if you are of differing points of view the electorate. they want tax reform and lesser government and a plan to take down the national debt. you have a primary electorate that agrees on the significant challenges facing our country. there's been such volatility. if you're a lady and goes to a wedding and she knows the dress she wants but they could to a

few stores and, quite find the -- and cannot quite find the the one item that fits all of their needs. some of that is happening in the primary process. if the electorate is united in their goals, everybody will come together once we have a nominee. the campaigns may not. there may be some feistiness among the candidates themselves. that nominee will stand for pretty much the same thing the electorate is looking for. host: derek from baltimore. caller: wayne from florida is a shallow-minded bigot. this black guy is the president of the united states.

debt over it. host: you're referring to the caller who doubted president obama's citizenship. caller: the guy is ignorant. he gets up every morning hitting the fact that this black man is the president of the united states. as for you, and you know what the republican party stands for? it stands for the party ofno diversity. i am a democrat from maryland. host: us get a response and let al cardenas defend the republican party. follow up on the criticism against president obama's citizenship having a racist overtones. guest: i would like to make a quick comment. i do not think either party has ownership of any group in

america, whether they are african-americans, hispanics, or asian americans. to think we think monolithicly is an insult. 2010 prove the case that minorities do want conservative leaders. we elected senator marco rubio in florida. we elected hispanics in texas. these were in districts that were previously held by democrat hispanics. we elected and hispanic in idaho. we elected to hispanic governors -- two hispanic governors of mexico. we elected two african-american members of congress. i am proud that all minorities are considering candidates. it is just as racist to criticize one particular group

as it is to lay claim to the fact that your party is hostile to them. both parties want as many members to support them as they can. sometimes they do a better job. and sometimes not. the country is better when minorities participate in both parties. i am comfortable being a conservative. in myve got friends community who are not. america needs to have respect and civility. it hurts me when somebody calls for such hostility. this is a great country. i care for this country so much. i pray and thank god every day that i was given the right to be an american. i have respect for other points of view. in this country, we need to do a better job of that. i think we are lacking a bit in civility and respect for

another's point of view and we are less our country when we do that. host: do you have concerns that the claims that president obama is not a u.s. citizen could be perceived as racist? guest: well, look, i have lived in politics, when our politics -- minority politics for so long. it is so easy to lay a claim of bias. there has been discrimination in america. one good thing we of done it is still much better with this and -- we have done is deal much better with this and make sure everyone in this country is equal and that is how we should be. i believe we're getting there. there are far less people that are biased. i do not know what the mindset or the motivation of the individuals are.

i do know there's been some concern about the president's bona fides. it took three years to present whatever document he was presenting. i think he was wrong to do that. i take the process at its word. i don't think you're a racist because you have your doubts. i think the president encouraged those doubts by not be more forthcoming. host: gary from arkansas, good morning. caller: good morning. host: welcome to the program. caller: i am a republican. i feel like in the republican race, it came down to where if

you have money, you are going to win this thing. that is not right. look at poor santorum starving to death. he has a good message. he will not make it because of big money. and that is not right. that is not the way this country was born. i am a disabled american veterans. i was in the war. i really do feel like this country is going the wrong way. this guy who called and that said the president is black and get over it. ok, fine. i do not care if he is green. if he is honest and he can do an honest job -- host: let's get a response.

why isn't rick santorum doing better in states like florida? guest: look, i'm a respectful person of the process. your ability to deal with the process effectively, in my opinion, has something to do with your ability to be a leader once you are in office. it has something to do with your ability to be a leader once you get elected to public office. you have to have to be able to sell yourself to those who make contributions whether a $10 contribution or $5,000. you have to organize teams and have important people and people who want to work for you organized in every state. all of those efforts are part of a winning campaign. if you are underwhelming in terms of the things you do, you are not going to win. that is fair. those are the rules. you have to understand the rules when you enter a contest.

i think the rules are fine. i do not believe money means everything. that gentleman said he supported the president but he thought that all that money was not good. this year the president will have $1 billion to spend. that is probably more than twice as much money as whoever the republican candidate will be. president obama is supported by as many bankers and wall street guys as any republican will be. they're both supported by the same areas -- lawyers, bankers, businessmen. that is what america is all about. getting into class warfare is

overlooking the record. democrats are going to be very well financed. by the same areas of business as the republicans will be. the winner will be the ones who captivate the hearts and imaginations of most americans. they are both going to be well- founded but the democrats will be better funded. by the same areas that these callers seemed to criticize. host: 1 last tweet from rick. let's look at a graphics looking at the age of registered voters in florida. they tend to be somewhat younger than non-hispanics. how do you think they will weigh in? guest: very interesting question. i have five registered children.

it is fun to talk about it at home. they are third generation, born in the states. we love to chat about this. national security was a big issue for us. we lived the nightmare of a communist thug taking over our country, taking away our property and our freedom and our rights. we believe the party that faced communism in the sternest of ways will be dealt with. -- we sympathized with. our generation may not have that as the ultimate litmus test. then they concentrate on domestic issues than older generations. i believe the younger generation is pretty conservative as well. they do not seem to be voting

much differently than the elders did, although perhaps for different reasons and with different priorities. host: al cardenas, thank you so much for joining us this morning from miami. guest: my pleasure. good to be with you. >> on tomorrow morning's "washington journal" florida republican political strategist sally bradshaw on her state's primary and who she expects to win. then more about florida's primary with hot line editor in chief, read wilson. he will also get the primaries in february and march. and after that, stuart powell on the future of nasa funding and how issues are being discussed in this election cycle. "washington journal" live tuesday at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. >> tonight on the

communicators, fcc commissioners toward the convention in the second in a series on developments. >> florida's primary is tomorrow and both newt gingrich and mitt romney are on the trail there. this evening, mitt romney holds a commit -- a community event live in about 35 minutes at 6:30 p.m. eastern here on c-span. and tonight, michem -- in new gingrich holds a campaign rally in tampa. he was introduced as -- introduced by michael reagan, and also herman cain, who endorsed him recently. you can see the rally with new

talking great to hear on c-span at 8:00 p.m. eastern. -- a new to gingrich here on c- span at 8:00 p.m. eastern. publicy of canada scot affairs channel, this is 45 minutes. [applause] >> mr. speaker, the government

received a mandate to gradually reduce our deficit to zero. but to do that, we will -- we have made a commitment to the canadian people to protect the vital programs. but the same time we have to make sure that they aren't -- they are sustainable for free generations. [applause] >> the prime minister went to such lengths to announce before the millionaires club that the conservatives will take an ax to the old age security benefits. it is obscene and insulting for our seniors. the conservatives are attacking seniors themselves. why does the prime mr. want to cut old age security benefits? tell us. the crux -- >> quite the contrary, and i am clear that we do not intend to cut payments to seniors. on the contrary, we are going to

protect our seniors. at the same time, we are making sure that the system will remain sustainable for now and in the future. [applause] >> mr. speaker, i do not think that answered my question we know the next budget will be about choices. he could strengthen the pension system, but prefers to cut corporate taxes. and millions for fdot-35's that do not work. this is lacking respect for our seniors who have given so much to the canadians. our seniors want to know why this government is targeting our seniors first. listening

to my answer. the reality is we are not cutting programs for our seniors. we are going to reduce the deficit to zero as we promised during the election. ,e're making sure the system the retirement income system, will remain susceptible for future generations. it will be goodbye. >> this government is more concerned with ceo's the van families. -- than families. seniors cannot trust this government. why are they offering

[unintelligible] by slamming the door on seniors? why? >> mr. speaker, that is completely false. what we will do is protect the retirement system that we have in place for our seniors. our seniors built this great country, but we have to make sure the system will be there for future generations, and we are protecting and we will protect these future generations under this system. >> they are going to choose to spend billions on this guy did prisons. the services canadians rely on. a quarter of a million seniors live in poverty and hundreds of

thousands of canadian families are out of work and they struggle to get by. seniors cannot trust this government. if the prime minister was so concerned, why did he not say anything about the election? [applause] >> we are going to preserve the system that exists for canadians, the retirement system, that already exists. what we have to do is make sure that going forward we have a sustainable system. the old age security system is not sustainable now. we are going to make it that way for the future. >> prime minister addressed this question during the election campaign. the prime minister stated categorically during the debate, as recently as november, this

government was not going to be touching transfers to individuals and transfers to seniors. he explicitly said that. now he is going to come up with the devil's answer? is the prime minister committed to assisting seniors or is he committed to breaking his election promises and breaking faith with the people of canada? >> this government ran on clear commitments and we are acting on those commitments. it is to reduce our deficit to zero without cutting transfers to individuals. that has been clear. we have the opportunity to look ahead, to look at challenges these programs faced in the future to make sure these programs will be available and viable for future generations. [applause] >> the prime minister of canada

cannot have it both ways. he cannot get to the people and his minister of the treasury board is saying on the exactly the same day as the prime minister was giving his statement that the present board was reassuring everyone that there would be no cuts to the provinces and there would be no cuts to transfers to individual seniors. the prime minister is a today, and what we're hearing clearly -- also from the minister of human-resources is the exact opposite. it is the politics of deceit and abandonment. >> mr. speaker, the leader of the liberal party is challenged when it comes to listening to the answer. we have been clear that as we reduce the deficit we will not cut the transfers. at the same time everybody understands their our

demographic realities that threaten the viability of these programs over the long term. we will make sure these programs are funded and viable for future generations that need is to. >> i do not have a problem hearing the answer, mr. speaker. the problem is that the answers change. if during an election, then there are lots of promises. the demographic changes -- it is not something, mr. speaker, that happened last week. the demographic change is a factor during the election. that is when promises were made, not only from the prime minister, but from all conservative party members, dick -- who made exactly the same promises. we're talking about the politics of a ban meant and deceit, mr. prime minister. >> thank you for talking about

[unintelligible] which made record cuts in transfers to promises and individuals. for this government, our commitment is clear -- we will eliminate the deficit without cutting transfers to promises or individuals, and at the same time we have a response polychaete the future generations to ensure the system will be viable for the future and that is what we will do. >> the conservatives failed in their commitments, including expanding home care, or forming primary care, and getting prescription drug costs under control. he said he will reduce the canada health transfer. fixing our health care system must be done by collaborating with the provinces. that is what canadians expect.

why is this government slamming the door in their face? >> mr. speaker, i stood before our government is committed to universal publicly funded health care. unlike the previous liberal government, which cut health- care transfers, we had announced a long-term stable funding arrangement with the provinces and territories that will see transfers reached historic levels by the end of the decade. thank you, mr. speaker. >> they cannot escape the reality that their ultimatum is in direct opposition of the principles of the canada health act. this will lead to greater privatisation, and canadians do not want to see one system for the wealthy and one for everybody else. i ask again, why is this government and abandoning its

leadership role in making canadians pay the price? what happens to their tent but it to accountability -- to their commitment to accountability? >> the federal transfers are projected to go -- to grow faster than average provincial spending on health care. i will continue to work with my colleagues to make sure that candida's health system is more sustainable and to improve accountability and deliver better services to canadians. that you, mr. speaker. -- thank you, mr. speaker. >> canadians are right to be scared about the upcoming budget. the president of the treasury board talked about imposing cuts on the order of 10%. that is $8 billion in public services. this government does not understand the reality.

cuts are not the answers. getting rid of jobs are not the answers. why build this government make families and workers pay for six years of mismanagement by conservatives? >> mr. speaker, canadians gave us a solid strong mandate to our government to make the decisions on behalf of all canadians. and to look at the situation -- with that mandate, as the prime minister has just said, we have and are working on a plan that will get us to balance within a reasonable period of time, a reasonable plan for canadians, as well as something for this house to consider. >> mr. speaker, i had not

expected such a response. cuts are having a negative impact who are involved on the endless red tape that people have to wait weeks to get benefits. the members of the government should understand that a majority does not give them a right cut the majority's programs. [unintelligible] >> i have said it is essential to have a plant with regard to the cuts in order to improve the situation with regard to the deficit. that is our plan, the plan we talked about during our previous election campaign, and was part of our 2011 budget. it is essential for this country to have an action plan.

jobs and growth, these plants are necessary, but we will do so under a -- these plans are necessary. >> what the prime minister is musing about cutting benefits, cuts have already been hurting seniors. some canadians are waiting up to eight months to get their old age security. they did not have eight months of savings and the bank. the cannot pay for food or medication. why does this government want to make problems worse by cutting more services to canadians? [applause] >> trying to make sure that canadians get benefits they are entitled to in a timely manner. it helps if people submit their applications on time -- [unintelligible] >> order.

the minister has the floor. >> we are working to -- that is why we -- to help that process along to people get the benefits they need. [applause] >> it was shameful that this government cuts services that canadians depend on. [applause] it is canadian business as well. service canada is unable to process -- in time. many companies have to pay to have application process is twice. governmenthe acknowledge problems they are causing, and reverse these cuts? >> what we are trying to do is

protect the integrity of that system, to make sure that people who come not replacing canadians who could have those jobs instead. we are trying to make sure temporary foreign workers are coming for legitimate jobs. we want to protect workers and protect canadians. sure wewhy we takmake take the time. >> instead of work with the provinces, conservatives are forcing their coslet agenda on canadians, costing taxpayers $1 billion alone. why won't the government were put provinces instead of downloading costs? don't they agree with democrats that pensions and services canadians rely on every day at a higher priority than the billions being spent on these presents the agenda?

[applause] >> there are inaccuracies in there, mr. speaker. ontario has had paid since increased by 77%. we have a responsibility to stand up for victims and that is exactly what this government is doing. >> mr. speaker, this government does not care about canadian families or provinces or territories for this government, it is my way or the highway. it is clear this government does not take advantage of the -- had done so it would have understood that quebecers -- government is pushing the bill for this inefficient prison system to

quebec. it will cost a lot for quebec. >> order. >> the member talking about the bill before parliament appeared this hit targets to start -- this bill targets drug dealers and traffickers. more than $2.4 billion has been added to the transfers of the provinces. we're doing our part and i would remind the hon. member that it is the victims who suffered the most from crimes. they paid the greatest price. [applause] >> mr. speaker, abolishing 1090 positions shows the government has contempt for the french language.

this goes along with the long list of attacks on the french language. how can the government claimed that all citizens will receive services in the language of their choice? >> that is untrue. there are a lot of programs, where you can learn french or english. that is part of our responsibilities toward canadians. we have continued a literal -- liberal government practice of language training to those who provide it to more people. >> mr. speaker, last week and served as a trend to pickpocket seniors by raising the old age qualifying age.

this cost-cutting measure was announced after they gave six. dollars to large corporations, $30 billion for untendered jets, and another billion for -- paying for these extravagant things on the backs of canada's seniors is ridiculous and shameful. seniors are can be forced to line up for food banks and that to kitchens, and have all heard those stories before. is that what the prime minister meant when he said he discussed the change the face of canada? shame on every one of you. >> [unintelligible] [applause] we have made a commitment to canadians in the last election that we would look after them, that we would respect the current system. the canada pension plan is fully buy up all -- is fully a viable. we want to make sure that for

generations to come, people can rely on the system to help them out, so we're part to make changes, but they will not include cuts to people who are currently receiving those funds. >> mr. speaker, last week in davos i would repeat the prime minister hinted about amending the pension plans and the old age security plan. the prime minister is ignoring the needs of over half of older canadians who count on the federal plan. asking the prime minister, what are your true intentions? millions of canadians depend solely on the government pension plan and the old age security. [applause] >> why did they vote against,

not once, but twice increasing the gis exception? why, did they vote against so many things that help to bring some many seniors out of poverty? why? >> it was cruelty for concerned as to deny seniors the tax credit. . the fact is for canadian seniors, 40% of those receiving oas make less than $20,000 per year. other countries are trying to address the issue of income inequality, what are conservatives in canada making income equality -- in the quality worse?

why the war on the poor? >> why is it they voted against [unintelligible] why is it -- >> order. the hon. minister has the floor. >> why is it the liberal [unintelligible] that is the funding that goes to the poorest of seniors. why did they vote against that? >> to date we learned the australians are thinking of slowing down the procurement of the f-35 fighter. project costs are exploding. i can tell you any soldier tasked with a mission as a plan b.

this government does not respect the basics. still notis minister ar producing a plan b? he raf has flown aircraft for 35 years. mr. speaker, australia faces an immediate challenge in replacing older aircraft much sooner, as we have been doing. we will continue to closely monitor the international development of the f-35 and the capabilities for the canadian forces. >> in the minister says that with the f-ouis fine 35 is irresponsible.

this minister still does not have a plan b period i would like to know when the minister will get his head out of the clouds and give us a plan b? >> speaker, i do not know where this comes from, other than desperation. mr. speaker, our government is committed to getting the best equipment for the canadian forces at the best price for canadians which the best benefits for canadian companies and workers. candida's participation in the development of the f-35, along with closest allies, assures canadian forces will have the best equipment to achieve mission success. >> despite cost overruns, we left off in 2011 with the

minister's sticking to the same story on the f-35. the u.s. has come to grips with reality. they canceled 179 planes and the late production of the rest. the australians are thinking of doing it again -- downsizing. with everybody else pulling the sheet, will the minister tell us how much more the f-35's will now cost canadians? >> we are monitoring the events closely with all of our nation partners as well. mr. speaker, as a sideline, the member that just stood up back in december was talking about some reports he read where there was supposed to be no training for canadian pilots. that report referred to in norway. the member does not know what he is talking about.

>> speaker, after six weeks away and in light of such significant changes, canadians were expecting the minister to have something more to say on this issue. around the world countries are taking a realistic look at the f-35 and cutting back on orders even in the united states. i value optimism, but here we have crossed over into a world of fantasy. special?-35's somehow how are our jets on contract while the rest of the world's falling off the rails? >> the member is absolutely wrong. we welcome the announcement that the united states which confirms their commitment to the multinational strike fighter. canada remains committed to the development of the new state-of- the-art aircraft that our brave

men and women agree that will give them the best probability of mission success. we continue to monitor the progress of the multinational drug strike fighter program closely and exercise responsible stewardship of tax payers' money. >> mr. speaker, canadians are concerned about crime and i have heard about constituents about yesterday bust verdict in the so-called honor killing. we know the sisters guilty because they were women. women who wanted nothing more than to live their lives according to canadian values, free from oppression and violence. as a justice said yesterday, it is physical -- difficult to think of a more heinous crime to kill your children than for a sense of honor. >> we have been very clear, so-

called honor killings are unacceptable and have no place in canada. [applause] we are committed to protecting women and other persons from all forms violence and hold offenders accountable. in canada murder is murder regardless of motive. our government has always focused on the rights of victims and not on the twisted rationale offered by convicted murderer were spurred we sent in message loudly and clearly. if you commit such terrible acts, you will face canadian justice. [applause] >> according to the master of natural resources, canadians who seek -- about the northern

gateway pieplant are radicals. we're no longer in the 19th century. what is radical is not to be concerned about the environment. [unintelligible] >> there are responsible environmental groups who contribute to the discussion of the use and development of our natural resources. there are also some radical environmental groups that are opposed to any development of our resources. they're using -- delayed projects as long as possible with the objective of killing them. we want an independent review that will be open and will do a scientific analysis that will -- but thousands of jobs are at stake --

>> order. [applause] >> mr. speaker we have a minister for the 19th century, because the minister of natural resources fails to understand the impact of conservative inaction on jobs, on the front, and on future generations instead what he does is he attacks people who care about the environment. it makes me wonder if the minister actually believes in a climate change. i guess my question to the minister is, is he a believer or er?eniey >> [applause] >> since we are into theology, i believe that no project in canada should go ahead unless it is safe for canadians and safe for the environment. however, groups that are opposed

to any development of hydrocarbons, groups that say that the oil sands which represent 1/1000 of global emissions will result in the destruction of the planet, these groups are not related to science. these groups are radical. these groups fight against -- [applause] >> mr. speaker, [unintelligible] to address in packs of proposed gateway pipeline. impacted by an issue projects, have fallen on deaf ears for decades. [unintelligible] fore tired of waiting promised regulation, maundering. mr. speaker, instead of pushing

the speed dial on these projects, won't this government take action to defend average [unintelligible] [applause] >> mr. speaker, under the federal framework for average economic development, our government is working in partnership with first nation of provincial and municipal governments and industrial developers to help first nation security social and economic to the element from the oil sands development. thank you, mr. speaker. >> mr. speaker, the minister would like to come up to -- have this discussion. the government promised to expedite the resolution of land claims to deliver financing for government spirit action is required to address longstanding

inequity is. first nation his tired of spending their money, failed commitment. will the government deliver on these promises in this year plus budget and in mr.'s legislative agenda? >> mr. speaker, we made great strides at the first nation's gathering. our government is committed to move beyond the constraints of the indian act. for example i was proud to announce last week at edition of 18 first nations to the first nations land management regime -- there is more to follow, mr. speaker. >> that allows me to ask the prime minister with respect to the average project, and

possession of the first nation's community that is affected by the party, i would like to ask the prime minister, the national energy board review does not have complete jurisdiction with respect to first nation's issues. i would ask the prime minister in particular, does he contemplate some additional process that will involve the direct discussion with respect to the impact of this project on first nations? >> mr. speaker, the hon. meter of the liberal party should understand that consulting with average -- aboriginal groups is a constitutional requirements. that is part of the process. at the same time i have to reiterate what i say to canadians before. is a tightly important national interest of this country that we're able export our energy products to asia, and that isn't it the government hopes will happen in the future.

-- and that is what the government hopes will happen in the future. >> is the government must position, consult with aboriginal groups. how is this position the same thing or is it the same thing of what we are seeing against the attacks, or are the attacks on those who are against the minister put and the prime minister himself? i am seeing two different approaches. >> to speaker, once again, this is a constitutional obligation to consult with aboriginal groups, and the government is going to comply with that. at the same time i have said

several times it is essential for canada to sell our energy products to asia and elsewhere in the world. so that we have better economic growth, and it is critical, it is important that the government has this position, and that we be careful of all these processes so we can decide -- >> [unintelligible] this is an example of the ineffectiveness of conservatives with respect to jobs street we need to address the canada act. thousands of jobs in the manufacturing and forestry sector -- the government has done nothing. will the prime minister continued to pretend that everything is fine? >> first of all [unintelligible]

is a labour problem and hoping it will be solved among themselves. they are mixing all these things out. they are against all foreign aid and investment. there are significant investments to improve innovation in canada. what did they do? they voted against it. they have no credibility when we are in these talks. >> speaker, the situation is catastrophic in montreal. the result is 700 quality jobs have disappeared. the prime minister was in davos to brag about the strength of

the canadian economy. if the prime minister finds the situation in montreal so encouraging, why did he go to davos? why did he not explain this to the workers who just got laid off? >> speaker, it is incredible. i was talking about the economic action plan in which there were significant sums to increase innovation across canada. talking about montreal, we're closing up this plant while at the same time we are opposed to the exploitation -- exportation of our natural resources. when we try to invest in the aerospace sector in montreal, they vote against it, and then they try to come and tell us what to do. it is incredible. [applause]

>> thank you, mr. speaker. canadians are concerned about being able to save for their retirement. if the ndp is their way, they would double the contributions. [applause] >>order. i would ask for members to hold off on their plots until the members had finished their comments. >> this would mean increase payroll taxes on small and medium-sized businesses. in this time of global economic uncertainty, imposing a tax on our key job creators is irresponsible. would the minister tell us what the government has done for termians for seniors'

approve >> i know she has been helping her constituents with sufficient on how to prepare for their retirement goals. today in the house of commons we are debating a new piece of legislation. the pension plan is a bear accessible plan, accessible all canadians. businesses are looking forward to it because there are 60 percent of canadians today in the work force that are not -- that do not have access to that pension plan. we provide that option. >> mr. speaker, education is the essential ingredient for success, yet the government funds education for first /3.ion's children at 2 will the government commit to

ending the unacceptable discrimination in the upcoming budget, or will first nations be forced to go to court to sue for equal funding? >> mr. speaker, we will continue to work proactively and clapper de vick with first nations' promises and the private sector to support programs and services students' success. is too early to post a budget. mr. speaker, that is a decision that will be forthcoming. thank you. >> got $5 million in tax breaks from this government to its generous corporate tax giveaway. they decided to cut workers' salaries in half, slash benefits, and turned to ship

canadian jobs overseas. white dust this government irresponsible -- why does this government and out tax giveaways and turn away from workers? it is the only producer of locomotives in this country. when will the government step up to the plate in the interest of canadians and canadian workers? >> this is a sad situation, but it is a labor dispute between a private company and union. we have been briefed by a local amp on this situation. this matter is on the government must first session - [unintelligible] >> mr. speaker, last week the member from st. john's shot the entire province by once again

calling for an end to this industry in canada. it is an attack on the northern communities that this -- that depend on this. will the regional minister please explain to this house what our government is doing to defend the canadian sealing industry? >> mr. speaker, last week the member shocked everyone with his comments. the member has been an opponent of the sealing industry for years. our government stands up for the industry at home and abroad. yes [unintelligible]

>> mr. speaker, the prime minister has repeated that he is supporting the democratic hopes of two nations -- now we have learned that canada wants to keep half of the profits. mr. speaker, this behavior is unacceptable. will the prime minister really want to come to benefit from a corrupt dictatorship? why don't we give this money back to tunisians? >> this government has been investing in tunisia. we would be seizing the assets of those that had been stolen from the people.

we will ensure that dictatorships will not steal from the people. the money will go back to the people that is rightfully theirs. this government is working hard to ensure those monies that were stolen from the people of two nations will be returned to the people of to me shot. >> mr. speaker a few days ago the prime minister announced that it in that reform of the pension plan is now one of his government post priorities. this reform means drastic cuts. how can this government justify wanted to save on the backs of the most disadvantaged seniors, buying jet fighters, reducing corporate taxes by billions of dollars? >> mr. speaker, it is not true at all. as i mentioned, already earlier

today, our government will ensure that seniors will keep all of the benefits that they receive as seniors at this point. we're not cutting any. we're going to keep the system that we have today and for future generations as well. >> i would like to draw the attention of the hon. mentors -- the hon. minister's to the gallery. >> for a possible primary is tomorrow. we're going live to hear from mitt romney speaking here at a retirement community called the villages, which is in central florida.

representative connie mack, and we see ann romney and some of the family members. >> i have the most interesting experience. i was visiting with people, and the sweetest lady walked over to me and she says, i know you. you are one of mitt romney's sons. don't i have the prettiest young mom? mom, by my calculation, dad of allowances.rs' another four years, and we are going to need more allowances. let me ask you, we have a choice. we heard one plant in the state of the union, didn't we? did you like that plan? d like the idea of more

government, more taxes, or regulation, or bailouts, more debt on our kids and our grandkids and their kids? or do you think that we should get back to the principles of our founding fathers as found in our declaration of independence and in our constitution? -government. do you believe we should take a course of lower taxes, less regulation, more personal responsibility? that calls for a leader, and we have got a leader among but don't take my word for it. om, a lady who has always been proud of our country. and who will make a great first

lady of the united states. please give a great villages welcome to it and romney -- to ann romney. >> thank you. when we drove up my grandson turned to me and he said -- [unintelligible] >> he saw this crowd and that was his impression. mitt and i have been married for a long time, 42 years. we have five sons. have the privilege of having my oldest and youngest son the right here. right here the old laws, right here in the young cast. two grandchildren, parker and allie. we're happy to have family with us tonight. family is important. when i was a young mom, mitt

travel a lot, and he would call home and here and exasperated wife raising these boys that are not as well behaved as they are right now. he would say, hang in there, i will be home soon, and don't forget, your job is more important than my job. my job is temporary. your job brings forever happiness. it was wonderful to know that i have a husband where we were equal partners in building a family and building children and building legacy that would bring this story, which is the grandchildren. -- this joy, which is the grandchildren. i will to use of the else i said for years ago at the end of the last campaign when we dropped out. i turned to mitt, i said one thing for certain, i am never doing this again. [laughter] here we are.

he said, you say that after every pregnancy. [laughter] i have five sons, but it was a year ago that we were making the final decision whether we were going forward or not. we were discussing it as a family. i said, i do not know who the opponents are going to be. he cannot figure out even what the issues are going to be by the final analysis. i said, if by chance you can make it through the process and you can win the presidency, there's only one question i need you to answer me to make a decision for me. can you fix it? he said, yes. with that, i said, ok, let's go. you know what put the country is worth it. we love this country, and we are worried about the direction is

going. we see that great city on a hill, the light is dimming, and we need to fix it and turn that light back up and do the things we have to do to bring this country back. i know there is one person who can do that, and this one person can beat barack obama, and that is mitt. let's see if we can get him to come out here. ♪ >> how are you? whow, it is great to beat back at the villages. it is always a beautiful day in the villages. thank you for welcoming me here. this is such an exciting time.

the other night i saw the president speak from washington. he said a couple weeks ago he had been at disney world at the fantasy land. what we heard from washington was also in fantasy land. it was like groundhog day all over again. he said the same thing, but nothing ever changes. i listened to the president and recognized it is clear that he would like to make us more like europe, more like a european social welfare state, and europe is not working in europe. the last thing we need is to have america become like europe. he wants to transform america. i do not want to transform america into something we will not recognize. , i want to restore the

principles that made us the way we are. i see this election as an historic election. we will decide if we will go off and the destruction of his choice or if we're going to stay true to the declaration of independence. he will talk about trillion- dollar deficits, and those deficits have ended up to more than $15 trillion in debt. he has put in place as much debt by the end of his first term and is only term, by the way, almost as much debt as all the prior presidents combined. if i am president i will take a different path. i will say we should cut federal spending, cap federal spending, and make sure we finally balance the budget, and i will get the job done. he would take us on a different course with regard to regulation

and the ability of small business to thrive. he was the author of an effort to reduce federal regulation last summer. he said they would go across of agencies and cut out unnecessary regulation. they cut out one-tenth of 1%. i can do a lot better than diet. i will stop all the obama-air regulations. i will make sure any of those that killed jobs week eliminate and get america back to work again. the president has an interesting view on health care. government knows better than people what kind of health insurance they need. i will appear will "obama-care ." a few are on medicare. is that true? i hope you tell your friends who

always fear that republicans somehow might go after medicare. you can tell them we will never go after medicare or social security. only one president in history that has cut medicare $500 billion, and that is barack obama. he did it to pay for "obama- care." i will protect social security and make sure we keep those program solvent for the next generations coming along. i will make sure we protect medicare and social security. there are other things about the path. his view about energy. he has stopped the development

of gas resources, the epa has held off on developing gas extractions. he has made it harder for coal. if i'm president, i will not stop our development of energy. i will open up the spigot, allowing drillers to get gas and oil, nuclear and we will once and for all have an energy policy and become energy secure and ultimately energy independence. the president has an unusual view tonight. he believes other nations are getting stronger and he at tends to appease and accommodate some of the world's worst actors.

remember in his debates three years ago he talked about in his first year he would meet with ahmadinejad. that did not work out so well. they did not want to meet with him. instead of trying to get friendly with enemies, we should be friendlier with our friends. my view is to make sure we stand by israel, stand by our allies in the world, and we do not in any way disrespect them. i will stand for israel and our friends. we will be stronger because america will stand for something, including our values. what part of his view about our foreign policy relates to the military? the president announced a $500 billion military cost reduction program. it seems one place in the budget he is willing to cut, and let me

give you a perspective on what is happening today. we have fewer ships in our navy that any time since 1917. we have an older and smaller air force fleet than any time since 1947 when the air force was created. you know how burned our soldiers have been with the number of rotations they have had going into afghanistan and iraq, and in a circumstance like that this president wants to reduce our commitment to defense. it is not because what has become safer. look around the world, north korea is going through a change of leadership, which puts that in play, china is saying they should have control of the south china sea, we should get their permission to go there. almost half of the world's trade goes through the south china sea. we have a nation in pakistan which is in the tumult. the arab world is going through a spring.

this is not a time to cut back on our military. i would make sure we have 11 aircraft carrier task forces. i would make sure we upgrade our air force fleet. i would add 100,000 active-duty personnel to the military. i will make sure that as we save money by finding ways in the department of defense, we use it for weapons systems, soldiers, and veterans to make sure they get the care they deserve. this is a campaign about the soul of america. are we going to become something i do not think we recognize, something that is more european, are we going to remain true to the principles of america? i love what the founders did. i love the bishop of the

founders of this country, when they wrote the declaration of independence. they said the creator had endowed us with our rights. not the state, not the king, the creator. among those rights were life, liberty,we would be free in thiy to pursue happiness as we choose, and the government would not tell us what we can do, and the circumstances of birth would not limit our potential. instead people could come here to pursue their dreams. and as they did, and as they sacrificed and got education, and tourists and had huge streams, as they did this this did not make us more poor. their success made us better off as a nation and we as americans are the most prosperous people on the earth. the average american has an

income that is a to% greater than the average european. we were founded on principles that are not just temporary but enduring. i love the declaration of independence and the vision of the founders and i want america to remain an opportunity society where people come here, seeking their own dreams. i do not want to turn this into an entitlement nation where people think that they are entitled to with their neighbor has, and the government will try to take from some to give to others. opportunitymerica, and the free. i love this country -- and i was a boy, my mom and dad put us in their car and took us to the national parks. we saw cypress gardens and the oceans and went west to see the canyons, rivers and mountains, and we fell in love with the

land in america. there is a song that captures that for me. oh beautiful, for spacious skies, for amber waves of grain. can you sing that song? l, for spacious skies, for purple mountain majesties above the fruited plane. america, america, god shed his grace on thee. and crown they good with brotherhood from sea to shining sea ♪ i love this country and i love its beauty, but even more astounding than the beauty of

the temple hills of america is the heart and passion of the american people. there is a. to this land that makes us an exceptional place. it was captured in those words in the declaration of independence, about life and liberty and note -- and the pursuit of happiness. i love the people who serve this country. there is another verse -- oh beautiful, for heroes, in liberating strife, who more than themselves their country loved, and more than life -- and other any members of the armed forces? thank you. this is impressive. and one more person is not as familiar to some. oh beautiful, for patriot dream

that sees beyond the years. the founders saw beyond their time, and what they wrote -- the rights that they gave us and the vision they crafted for america was not temporary in purpose but lasted until our time and perhaps beyond. i want to bring back those things. i believe in american greatness and american exception alyssum. i will do everything in my power to restore those values and keep america the place where you know your kids and grandkids will have a brighter future than what we have enjoyed in the past. i love this nation for what we have achieved in the world and i love america for all we will do in the future. get out there and vote and let's keep america rolling.

♪ ♪ born again

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

>> we will have live primary results from florida starting at 8:00 eastern. if you missed this rally will have this at 9:00 eastern on c- span. ♪

>> tongiht, newt gingrich with a campaign rally in tampa. he was introduced by michael reagan and herman caine. you can see this at 8:00 eastern on c-span. >> c-span's road to the white house takes you live on the campaign trail. >> if i am president of the united states, one thing i will do is begin an economic initiative of drawing latin- american and american businesses

together. it will help lift parts of the world. >> this is about a new grand coalition of americans who come together to creat e a country to rebuild the country we love. that is what 2012 is all about. >> there -- he is 105 years old. >> you might remember me -- >> good to see you. >> the leader in puerto rico. >> tomorrow night, watch our primary results with candidate speeches and your reactions. tonight on "the communicators," cleburne and -- the second oin

communication and technology -- >> tomorrow on "washington journal," sally bradshaw on her states primary and who she expects to win. and more on the primar y with reid wilson. and we will look to primaries in feabruary anbruary and march. how space policy issues are being discussed. washington journal is live tuesday on c-span. earlier today, obama met with georgia's president at the white house, and says the u.s. will begin to move to afrefree trade

with georgia. this is 10 minutes. >> i wanted welcome the president here, as a central be celebrating 20 years of independence. the eighth anniversary of the revolution. georgia should be proud of the progress they have made in making a solid and democratic effort. what i did is express my appreciation for the institution building that is taking place. the importance of making sure that minorities are respected. the importance of a police and the system of rule of law that

is being observed. the kinds of institution- building that will make an enormous difference in the future of this generation and future generations. i want to express my appreciation for the work of the past and also anticipating fair and free elections here, with the formal transfer of power, that is taking place in georgia and will solidify much of what is taking place. we discussed how we can strengthen the strong, bilateral relationship between these countries. part of this is economic. georgia has taken strides in creating an effective free market system. more progress needs to be made. the united states wants to help them in their progress.

the most important thing that we are doing with this -- this is also what we have agreed to as a high-level dialogue between these countries about how we can continue to strengthen trade relations between these two countries, including the possibility of a free-trade agreement. there is a lot of work to be done and there will be a lot of options that will be explored. we think this is winning for the united states and georgia. for us to be able to sell georgia our goods and services -- and on defense and security i expressed my gratitude to the president for the extraordinary contributions that have been made by the military of georgia

in afghanistan. they have been one of the most dedicated contributors to the ics effort. they have taken on some significant casualties. as a consequence of those efforts. we have talked about strengthening the defense cooperation and of their are a wide range of areas where we are working together. i reaffirmed to the president that the united states will continue to support their aspirations, to become a member of nato. and finally, i wanted to say to the president we appreciate the model of democracy and transparency that they have been setting up, not only for their

own country but the whole region. we think that with continued progress over the next few years, a lot of countries will say to themselves, in georgia can perform these transformations then we can as well. they have been a responsible player on the world scene, and so, under the leadership of the president i think that they have made enormous strides and we will continue to look for the opportunities to strengthen what is a strong bilateral relationship. >> thank you. i am very honored to be back in the oval office and i can tell you that we are incredibly grateful as a nation. we are grateful for the continued support, and the strong cooperations, with the united states of america.

for the future of our democracy, this is absolutely decisive and going in all different directions. this is a very good understanding, at a number of levels. this is great for the support of the aspirations with nato, and we want to continue the aspirations further. and the capabilities of developing the. this is an important message back to my nation. it is very important that you mentioned, obviously, the prospect of a free-trade agreement because this will attract a lot of additional activity to my country, basically helping the nation- building process. obviously the reform process is never over. this would not have happened

without a strong commitment, and strong advice from your administration and the people on the ground. this year we have the parliamentary elections, which are bringing in other political system. and with the reclamation, we are moving to democracy for the and we will attempt to diversify the political scene. we will continue to cooperate with you. nothing can take georgia away from this progress.

this is a retrograde political system, and ultimately, this is very successful, and i will be leaving this office very happy because we want to work together. thank you. >> thank you, everybody. thank you. >> sorry about that. >> it's okay. >> white hosuuse press secretary james carney said the fall of asaad is inevitable, and the u.s.s is having discussions with russia about syria.

hillary clinton is going to the united nations security council to talk about the next step. >> thank you for being here. i hope that you are enjoying a spectacular weather. before i take questions the president will have an interview with youtube and google plus. the interview will be held through a google hang out, making it the first completely virtual interview from the white house. there will be voted on with cities from of the country. 228,000 people have submitted 3000 questions leading up to this interview with the president.

they will engage with americans throughout the country, virtually in the google plus hangout. the white house has launched an official pleasant -- presence on google plus, with engagement opportunities. this kicks off a series of hangouts. members will continue to communicate this way. it will be to the briefing room - >> what is google plus? >> it is google's social media vehicle. but for more questions i refer you to the good folks at google. you are right to ask. the associated press. >> there are reports out of

cairo, the u.s. embassy was providing shelter to keep them from arrest. is the white house doing anything else to assure their freedom? >> there are a number of american citizens at the embassy. the handful of citizens and elected to stay as they were waiting for the ability -- these are citizens who have been told they cannot leave egypt. we have, in our discussions with the staff and the supreme council of the armed forces, we made clear our concerns about this issue, that the citizens have not been allowed to depart egypt, with the discussions with

the ngo's. >> you said a handful and several -- >> i don't have anything more specific than that, and nothing to give you or any individual names. >> they are in danger of arrest? >> with the issue is, -- what the issue is, the egyptian authorities have said they cannot leave the country. i don't know that there is an issue of arrest. i would refer you to the state department. >> is there a change in egypt particularly in the hold of the military council has on power. >> i know that egypt has achieved several historic milestones in their transition,

since the revolution and the transfer of the authority by the supreme council, and the announcement that they were taking steps to list the state -- lift the state of emergency that has existed in egypt for decades. the peaceful resolution made this possible. we congratulate the egyptians on this and these important steps. as we all remember, -- it is important to remember that egypt has come a long way. he started his round of questions, we are concerned about them and we are in discussions with egyptian authorities about this. >> the happenings on the

republican campaign trail, you have the reaction of the chairman -- comparing obama to the italian ship captain, abandoning his passengers. >> if you are so desperate for attention that you make an analogy that michael steele deems inappropriate you have probably gone too far. >> the russian foreign ministry has expressed a willingness to take part in a talk. of all -- resolve a serious crisis. would there be any concern that this would just further delay the process -- of asaad's exit?

>> we don't have details on this meeting but support efforts for a political solution. we are intensely discussing the real deterioration on the ground and the rise in violence, and how best to use all the levers to press the syeriarian governmt to stop tehiheir appalling repression. we are working with all our partners. >> the initiative -- >> we believe the security council should not permit the asaad regime to assault the syrian people.

we appreciate their role in this process. goverments who support him will be criticized for further human reights violations. inevitable. ins as they make make decisions about where they stand on this issue, with regards to the brutality of this regime, it is important to calculate into the considerations the fact that he will go. that will eventually fall. >> their the international efforts to arrange his exile? >> this is not what i am aware of.

we are continuing to work to pressure the asaad regime to get them to stop the brutal and appalling behavior and step aside so that this transition to democracy and a peaceful transition can take place. >> the president in his weekly address said a senator was going to hold all nominations. is this a complete breakdown of the system? >> let's examine the first part of your question. it is an example of how the system has broken down. a single senator can hold up all nominations.

that is highly unfortunate. that is why the president mentioned in his weekly address. it is not how the system should work. to hold up the process and claim that no nominations will be cleared until the president removes the consumer watchdog so vital to the implementation of wall street reforms that were put into place to prevent the kind of disastrous financial crisis that caused the greatest recession since the great itself. it is not a position that would be broadly supported by the american people. it may not even be a position supported by the constituents of

the senator in question. it is the wrong approach. it is not conducive to getting the work the american people want done, done here in washington. >> there are reports that freddie mac has securitized large sections of its mortgage holdings to earn interest at the expense of homeowners who could refinance. if they did so, freddie mac would lose money on their investment portfolio. does this constitute a conflict of interest? >> we saw the reports. they certainly raised some concerns. this is an independent institution with independent governance, so we do not make those kinds of decisions. i believe treasury is looking into it. >> the president has requested they make financing easier and more affordable. >> i am not an expert on this.

i do not know that it flies in the face of that at all. i think is an adjustment worth looking at by an independent agency. the president's commitment to making refinancing more available is absolutely firm and not changed by anything this independent agency is doing. you will hear more details about that from the president this week, about the refinancing initiative. >> how much of a drag will the continued debt problems increase have on u.s. economic economy? >> we have said and it continues to be the case that europe remains a concern. the europeans have taken important steps towards dealing

with their financial and markets issues. there have been positive developments. more work needs to be done. this is a european issue. the europeans have the capacity and wherewithal to resolve it. we have been very engaged at the level of the president and secretary of the treasury in an advisory capacity. we have some experience dealing with this kind of financial crisis, mitigating it, and resolving it. economy a problem in europe could affect our economy only reminds us and reinforces the fact that we need to take every measure we can on the issues we control to ensure that our creating jobs.

that is why the president. for the american jobs act in the fall. that is why he looks forward to the congress extended the million americans as well as unemployment insurance. it is why he will continue to press on the initiatives contained in his state of the union address aimed at economic growth in the manufacturing sector and innovation. because it is a world filled with potential problems to our global economy that may or may not transpire, you need to do everything you can as a member of congress and the president to create some insurance for our economy that can continue to grow and create jobs. that is what this president is committed to doing. what specifically has he been>>

i do not have any recent bull calls to read out to you. for many months, he has been engaging with his european counterparts on this issue. that is by telephone as well as in meetings. the g-20, for example. secretary geithner has as well with his counterparts. he has traveled to europe. while is a european issue that requires a european solution, we have important experience we can bring to bear in advising, offering our advice and counsel to the europeans. we urge the europeans to continue to take the measures necessary to stabilize the situation and build a firewall necessary to ensure this is resolved. >> during the state of the

union, the president was talking about the importance of keeping young people in school. he said he is proposing that every state requires that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn 18. what specifically is the president going to do to push this proposal forward? >> i do not have any more details on the proposal. the president believes it is very important that in today's economy it is vitally important that the states take action to ensure americans stay in school and get the education they need, the minimum education they need to be competitive in the workplace. the president's commitment to

education as a cornerstone to our economic growth has been clear for three years. his approach has been to reform in a way that has enjoyed bipartisan support. he looks forward to continuing to work with members of congress and other stakeholders to push education reform forward. it really is about our economic future. we need to make sure we have the most skilled work force, the most educated work force, because that is our competitive the vantage with other countries around the world. >> are we going to get any details about the buffett rule or will it be in the budget? >> i would not expect more details from us prior to the

budget. the buffett rule is the principle that will guide the president's approach to tax reform. in an environment like the one we live in where we have important investments we need to pay for, whether it is national security or investments in education, everybody needs to pay their fair share. it is not fair to have a tax code that because of loopholes and other things in it that you have millionaires and billionaires paying less of their income than middle-class americans. you will get more details but

not prior to the budget. >> vice president biden attended a retreat where he shared details about the decision-making process on the obl raid where he says he recommended against it. is that accurate? >> vice president biden was one of the handful of people involved in the process. i know he is speaking accurately. the broader point the president has made is that this was not a pfft sure thing. the president had so much faith in our special forces and their capacity to fulfill the mission that he made the call to go forward.

i think secretary gates has spoken about this as well. that is why it is a presidential level decision. as with a lot of decisions, and your advisers come together and have compelling arguments on either side. you have to make a call. that is what the president did in this case. roger. >> mr. furman mentioned m.rporate tax refor about that around the release of the budget. i mean around that date.

specific date. >> a senator is introducing legislation to give congress the authority to approve keystone. will the white house weigh in in opposition to that? >> it is important for you and everyone to remember in looking at the issue how we got here. the process is in place consistent with the president where the state department is reviewing the request for a permit hearing. when significant concerns were raised about the pipeline route, hah a decision was made to seek an- alternate route, one that did hah not run through territory over the aquifer in nebraska.

the president concurred with the decision to require an expansion of the time. to review the request that would be appropriate. as far as i know, the alternate route still has to be identified. there was clear warning from the state department that doing so would put them in an untenable position. they chose to insert the extraneous measures, insuring the state department would recommend denying the permit because you could not grant a permit on the pipeline route that had not been identified. that is why we are where we are. whatever actions are taken in congress, it is important to have that as a backdrop when you are writing about or discussing it.

>> i am wondering if the white house has a sense of -- >> let's see what happens. i do not have anything to predict. >> will the president be asking georgia to contribute more troops in afghanistan? what kind of impact may it have on u.s.-russia relations? >> the president looks forward to the meeting with the georgian president today in the oval office. this is the 20th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the united states and the republic of georgia. they will discuss further strengthening the charter on the strategic partnership by enhancing cooperation in the field of trade, tourism, energy, science, education, culture, and security. he will underscore the

importance of defense contributions and cooperation. of their territory within the recognized borders. he looks for to discussing upcoming elections in georgia and the reforms that will ensure their continuing transformation into a vibrant and stable democratic state. how is that for an answer? >> [unintelligible] >> we can wait for the meeting to happen and then provide a readout. our approach to georgia and their relations to russia have not changed. this meeting, the president looks forward to it for all the reasons i just described. >> recognizing the upcoming

budget will have elements of restraining spending and also try to preserve the economic recovery, which direction will tilt toward? more spending to make sure recovery does not go south or really getting a handle on the debt? >> as you know because you reported on it, spending has already been decided through the budget control act. the overall amount that will be put forward in the budget was decided in august in a bipartisan vote. it is important to remind everyone that when it comes to deficit reduction in dealing with long-term debt, this president has already locked in over $2 trillion in deficit

reductions through spending cuts. more needs to be done. you can be sure the proposal the president last fall for comprehensive and balanced reductions will be reflected in his budget because it is the right way to go. every independent bipartisan commission has said that, which this president from one believes. the balanced approach has to entitlements. the president has been committed to the approach from the beginning. you will see it reflected in the budget. spending was decided with republicans last summer. >> secretary panetta says it is possible iran could have a nuclear weapon within a year should they decide to try and do that. senator lieberman says at some

point, the u.s. is going to have to decide whether to act militarily to prevent that. the president has already said all options are on the table. will he have to make that decision within a year? will he have to decide whether to use military force to deal with iran's nuclear program? >> president has said he is determined to prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. that is our policy. he has also said he takes no options off of the table. the strategy he has been pursuing with broad international support has resulted in the most onerous sanctions ever placed on iran that have had a clear effect on the iranian economy and regime. they have isolated iran more than it has ever been.

we will continue the pressure using all the means at our disposal working with the international community to pressure iran into living up to its international obligations. >> do you agree with that timetable, that he will have to make a decision in the year? >> i think the secretary went on to talk about delivery vehicles and the timeline for that. i do not want to get into analyzing timetables. i can tell you this president's policy is clear. he has stated repeatedly that he and his administration are determined to prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. we have a comprehensive strategy we have been executing with the international community that is having a clear impact on the iranian economy.

we continue to make it clear to the iranians that the way to relieve the pressure is to live up to its obligations. that is the right approach. it is also the right approach to take no option off the table. >> i do not deny the impact the sanctions are having. they also do not seem to be dissuading iran from moving forward with the nuclear program. does the secretary's assertion they can do it in the year put pressure on the president to make a decision within a year? >> it is an estimate based on the administration's view of the development of the process in iran. it does not change our strategy

which is to continue to put pressure, continue to isolate, continue to make clear to iran what its options are and how their behavior has caused it. it is also to make it clear that we're not removing options from the table. we can then move forward. >> other than having an impact on the iranians economy, is it having any other effects? >> what effect would you look for economic sanctions to have other than on the economy? they are having the desired effect. ultimately it the diplomatic/sanctions approach, we hope will have the effect of changing iranian behavior. it is important to push the

process forward working with our international partners. it is a fact that we have a situation where the world is united against iran on this issue. iran internally is divided. that is the reversal of the world as it was when president obama took office. much of the world was blaming the united states and its approach for what was clearly iran's problem. through the policies of this president and the actions he has taken, the world now sees iranian behavior for what it is. that has resulted in the kind of sanctions that are having an effect. >> can you say specifically

where the ship is headed? >> i would refer you to the department of defense. >> could this be headed towards iran? >> i would refer you to the department of defense. our presence in the gulf and the strait of hormuz is part of a rotation that has not changed at all. it ensures we maintain a significant presence in the gulf. on the specific issue, i would refer you to the pentagon. >> over the weekend, 400 protesters were arrested in oakland. today, the national park service is clearing out protesters as we speak from a site in d.c. what is your reaction? is the administration concerned the protesters are taking it too far?

>> with regards to oakland, that matter. specifics. our position continues to be that we need to balance first amendment concerns of the right to demonstrate and speak freely with public safety concerns and public health concerns. we understand local law weighing those considerations when they make decisions as appropriate. >> says mr. grossman was unable to get into pakistan, has the president had a conversation about the state of our relations with pakistan?

>> i am not aware of any conversations the president has had with mr. grossman. i could give you our view of the u.s.-pakistan relations and the fact that that relationship has been and continues to be complicated, but is very important to our national security interests, to our fight against al qaeda, and to the stability of the region. that is our broad view. i do not have anything specific on the president and ambassador grossman. >> why have the afghan meetings fallen off? can you tell us about how many meetings he has had? >> it is a high priority, a

national security party for the president. we are transparent about the implementation process that the president has taken, and will continue to be. we are in a phase of drawing down the forces. as we began -- in terms of meetings of the af-pac, it is an issue that is discussed in the president's national security time with the advisers. >> the turks tried a few months ago to have talks with assad, at that time the president waited for a few days but told the turkish president is not working, we have to move on. i wonder why in light of that

precedent you said he sounded somewhat open to the russian effort. >> the efforts to bring about a solution that results in the us audit regime -- the assad regime leaving. we welcome evarts by the arab league -- we welcome efforts by the arab league, the russians, because we share the goal here. it will not stop us. >> you are sending hillary clinton up to new york. >> she put out a statement on this issue and making our position very clear. the security council should not

permit the assad regime to attack their people. assad's fall is it inevitable. as countries make this determination about the approach they want to take, they should he genie is out of the bottle. everybody needs to work toward a peaceful transition in syria. >> the last time around the administration was willing to give the turks some time. now you are saying to the russians, we're going full speed ahead at the u.n.

>> these processes do not happen finger.snap of a thinke as we saw over the weekend, the level of carnage in syria seems to be increasing, the appalling brutality is not abating at all, and it is important the international community come together to make clear to the regime that this is unacceptable and it pass to stop. >> many people have heard the rumor about -- in new york. can you help us squash this rumor? >> this is utterly false and it is irresponsible that an american news organization would repeat the story, allowing